No, they shouldn't. Most of that is base on what OS you are using and the programs BLAH BLAH BLAH.
Do multi-processor system require a lot of RAM?
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Probably depends on what programs you're running. You'd probably want to have more than 2GB because the OS will have more overhead managing the threading and such... But I don't think it matters all that much. Though if you're running a program that needs four CPUs it probably needs a lot of RAM as well.
![]()
Thanks guys!
lol, i'd say half my report is on here with the amount of questions I have asked, everyone has been so helpful though!
![]()
lol, i'd say half my report is on here with the amount of questions I have asked, everyone has been so helpful though!
well... here is my point of view... considering that the CPU is the "worker" and the RAM is the "workstation" then you can calculate how much space does a worker need to work, and how much space do 4 workers need to work, so that's it, and it is not reasonable to force all the "4 workers" to work in a traditionally "workstation" RAM designed for a lonely "worker" CPU.
![]()
It depends upon the workload, but also very important is where the RAM is.
If you need 16GB of RAM (no at all uncommon in the 4 socket arena, and almost a bit low) on a 4 socket board, don't buy 4x 4gb sticks and slap them into only one bank of 4 slots, you have to make sure to distribute them so as all CPU's have their dual/triple/quad channels.
Quote:
Is that going by slicing the system into 4 VM's?
With a 4 socket system it will appear as 4x (number of cores), so it really is like any other system, you just have to make sure that you have the RAM seated in the correct channels for optimal performance.
If you need 16GB of RAM (no at all uncommon in the 4 socket arena, and almost a bit low) on a 4 socket board, don't buy 4x 4gb sticks and slap them into only one bank of 4 slots, you have to make sure to distribute them so as all CPU's have their dual/triple/quad channels.
Quote:
Originally Posted by the magical me  well... here is my point of view... considering that the CPU is the "worker" and the RAM is the "workstation" then you can calculate how much space does a worker need to work, and how much space do 4 workers need to work, so that's it, and it is not reasonable to force all the "4 workers" to work in a traditionally "workstation" RAM designed for a lonely "worker" CPU.
|
With a 4 socket system it will appear as 4x (number of cores), so it really is like any other system, you just have to make sure that you have the RAM seated in the correct channels for optimal performance.
2
Quote:
Not... really. In fact, just no.
You could get four CPUs and get the minimum amount of RAM possible (say 256MB)... Run NetBSD on it and it will work just fine. Will it be able to run programs that you'd need four CPUs for? Probably not. But four CPUs can coexist just fine.
A better analogy would be mathematicians and chalkboards. The smart guys can get along just fine with a fairly small chalkboard when they're doing simple crap... 2+2=4. But with more complex tasks they need more room for their calculations, so if you wanted them to solve field equations you'd need a lot more chalkboard space.
It isn't that the CPUs need RAM, it's that the things you want the CPUs to do need RAM. Understand?
Originally Posted by the magical me well... here is my point of view... considering that the CPU is the "worker" and the RAM is the "workstation" then you can calculate how much space does a worker need to work, and how much space do 4 workers need to work, so that's it, and it is not reasonable to force all the "4 workers" to work in a traditionally "workstation" RAM designed for a lonely "worker" CPU.
|
You could get four CPUs and get the minimum amount of RAM possible (say 256MB)... Run NetBSD on it and it will work just fine. Will it be able to run programs that you'd need four CPUs for? Probably not. But four CPUs can coexist just fine.
A better analogy would be mathematicians and chalkboards. The smart guys can get along just fine with a fairly small chalkboard when they're doing simple crap... 2+2=4. But with more complex tasks they need more room for their calculations, so if you wanted them to solve field equations you'd need a lot more chalkboard space.
It isn't that the CPUs need RAM, it's that the things you want the CPUs to do need RAM. Understand?
2
Quote:
They don't need space, the RAM will be pooled.
I can run my windows server 2008 just fine with 2GB and 16 cores. Now if I want to add 2 VM's, thats another story.
RAM amount is dependent on the task, and nothing else. for best performance with demanding applications, it is best to divy up the RAM across the 4 CPU's (so each CPU access its own memory, rather then having to go through its neighbors).
Originally Posted by the magical me well, I haven't said that it's NECESSARY to add 4x the normal amount or RAM for a single processor, but I only recommended this, because the extra 3 CPU with the first one will find a good space to achieve those INTENSIVE TASKS they were employed altogether for. |
I can run my windows server 2008 just fine with 2GB and 16 cores. Now if I want to add 2 VM's, thats another story.
RAM amount is dependent on the task, and nothing else. for best performance with demanding applications, it is best to divy up the RAM across the 4 CPU's (so each CPU access its own memory, rather then having to go through its neighbors).
Quote:
This makes a lot of sense (I think?).
So essentially, each processor (lets say 4) would be assigned to a memory slot and if it ran out of ram (4 ram slots) THEN it would borrow from a neighbour?
Originally Posted by trueg50 They don't need space, the RAM will be pooled. I can run my windows server 2008 just fine with 2GB and 16 cores. Now if I want to add 2 VM's, thats another story. RAM amount is dependent on the task, and nothing else. for best performance with demanding applications, it is best to divy up the RAM across the 4 CPU's (so each CPU access its own memory, rather then having to go through its neighbors). |
So essentially, each processor (lets say 4) would be assigned to a memory slot and if it ran out of ram (4 ram slots) THEN it would borrow from a neighbour?
Quote:
Yes, however I don't believe it is about running out of RAM before hitting up its neighbors RAM slot, but rather if the data is cached in its neighbors RAM then it will access it. Then if it is an older setup with FSB rather than QPI, you have to take a big performance hit by going to the neighbor, however if you get one of the new Nehalem EX chips when they are released (they are 4 socket's) then it will use the NUMA setup that Error10 was talking about and the performance hit will me minimal.
Originally Posted by Sin100 This makes a lot of sense (I think?). So essentially, each processor (lets say 4) would be assigned to a memory slot and if it ran out of ram (4 ram slots) THEN it would borrow from a neighbour? |
Quote:
I have heard of multiprocessor mainframes having up to 64GB of ram, 8GB really being the minimum for a mainframe.
Originally Posted by ln2ftl No, RAM depends on how many tasks you need to do at once. 2GB is the bare minimum and I don't see any need for more than 4GB. |
You can buy Nehalem workstation boards now which will support up to 96GB of RAM. I want one.
![]()
Quote:
4 GB is a minimum on these kinds of systems. Try breaking up that server to 4 fat VM's with good performance with each, suddenly +16GB is a must.
Quote:
Boy I hope for a Skulltrail-like nehalem system some time along.
Originally Posted by ln2ftl No, RAM depends on how many tasks you need to do at once. 2GB is the bare minimum and I don't see any need for more than 4GB. |
Quote:
Originally Posted by error10 You can buy Nehalem workstation boards now which will support up to 96GB of RAM. I want one.
|
3
Quote:
ASUS Z8PE-D12X(ASMB4-IKVM) Dual LGA 1366 Intel 5520 Tylersburg SSI EEB 3.61 Dual Intel Xeon 5500 Series w/ Remote Management, PCI-X Server Motherboard - Retail
![]()
Originally Posted by trueg50 Boy I hope for a Skulltrail-like nehalem system some time along. |
2
And it'll run straight up ddr3, no need for ecc reg shenanigans.
Unfortunately, you won't be oc'ing anything on it though. If only 1 of the companies making a 1366 dually board would open up the bios options they'd be sitting on a gold mine. As of yet there aren't any.
That's a great board though, been sitting on my wishlist for quite a while now.
![]()
Unfortunately, you won't be oc'ing anything on it though. If only 1 of the companies making a 1366 dually board would open up the bios options they'd be sitting on a gold mine. As of yet there aren't any.
That's a great board though, been sitting on my wishlist for quite a while now.
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
